Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:29:48PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
>>How about the following patch?  Noet that vfree() handles a NULL argument,
>>so it's not necessary to check the pointer.
> 
> 
> That patch is crap -- it only frees the memory on the error path, not
> the normal exit.  Since I got confused by this function, it struck me
> as not unreasonable that somebody else might also get confused by it
> and split it into two parts.
> 
> I simplified some of the code.  The old code took the lock, scanned
> through looking for a free slot, dropped the lock, allocated an sdp,
> grabbed the lock and checked the slot was still free, branching back
> if it had raced.  This rewrite assumes that we will find a slot and
> allocates an sdp in advance.
> 
> Does anybody like this patch?  It survived booting on my test box which
> only has one scsi device.  More testing welcomed.

Sorry, I missed this thread. The change looks good and survived
about one hour of scsi_debug bashing (on i386). I also checked
it against the previous version.

Attached is my version with only a superficial change to 2
printk()s plus:
   - bump version number
   - introduce MODULE_VERSION
   - increase over allocation of sg_dev_arr from 6 to 32

Doug Gilbert